D&D 5E Dealing with a trouble player and a major blow up

[Ohillion]

Remember folks. D&D is not serious business. If children can get along playing this game, how sad is it that adults cannot do the same?

I'd agree. The whole premise of fantasy games is just that...they're FANTASY games. This whole situation stinks of fantasy and reality becoming too much the same thing. You can't discuss morality seriously in a fantasy game. It's just not condusive to fun gameplay. You play your alignment and let the other characters play theirs. We have a hard a fast rule at our table: good and neutral alignments only. I can't see how an adventuring party can work through 20 levels of play without trying to kill each other if there's good and evil alignments present. This, IMHO, is my take on the demise of your party and play. Were you aligned similarly (not necessarily equally) you might not have even had to deal with this conversation. But I DO believe you would just end up with a different situation based on the character and nature of those at the table. You two are the catalysts in this disaster. It's probably best that you just walk away. I'm not pointing a finger here but you two are oil and water and never the two shall mix! It's just who you are and how your personalities stand.

 

[neobolts]

They were true to their word and neither of them showed up on Tuesday.

I now have to decide if its worth it for me to attend the Sunday game. Not showing up will pretty much end the Sunday game.

D&D is not a charity.

A lot of this thread is getting hung up on "who was wrong" or "who should apologize". It doesn't matter if you are at fault or the other guy, it matters if you are having fun.

If you are not enjoying your leisure time, don't do it. If all parties are harmed by animosity at these games, then they aren't worth playing.

 

[77IM]

I am sensing a pattern.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

If you are not enjoying your leisure time, don't do it. If all parties are harmed by animosity at these games, then they aren't worth playing.

I agree, This is the crux of the issue. And I AM having fun. He is such a small part of our table and his characters are so bland as to be virtually non-existent. They rarely say anything or have any opinion. Most sessions I barely notice he's there. My roommate, his girlfriend, our DM, and the other 2 guys in our group are all genuinely my friends and I have a great time playing with them. This group is very dedicated to playing D&D and I often enjoy playing with them MORE than my Saturday group. Although the Saturday group has no tension, the players randomly fail to show up, no one takes the game seriously at all and they are very much "beer and pretzels" players. The Sunday group(other than the guy this thread is about) tends to have a lot more interesting characters, real thought is put into their actions, everyone knows the rules like the back of their hand, and so on.

Mostly, I'm concerned that he's blown up 3 different times in the last 2 years. All of the times he's blown up, it's been at me. But at this point I don't know what it is that sets him off. I can play with him for a year straight with no incidents and have fun playing. Then one day I say my opinion on killing world leaders and suddenly I'm kicked out of the house and the game is cancelled and he's threatening not to attend our public D&D games any more. I'm worried that each thing I say might be something that causes my week to suck as I worry about this same thing again.

Every time I think "Screw this, I don't need this anymore", I remember the fun I've had to the last year and the people I enjoy playing with. Even him when he isn't yelling at me or acting like an idiot.

 

[KingsRule77]

You like the drama.

 

[Ohillion]

Mostly, I'm concerned that he's blown up 3 different times in the last 2 years. All of the times he's blown up, it's been at me. But at this point I don't know what it is that sets him off. .

I think you've just found the common denominator. I'm not even being snarky here. You've identified that you are the one that sets him off. Sometimes, getting away from conflict is realizing that certain personalities don't gel. If your two personalities are causing these rifts, someone has to go. Either be removed, do the removing, or remove yourself. The last option is often the highest road to take.

You've now spent 29 pages of thread to figure out what to do...what is your decision? I think you've recieved a good amount of advice by now.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I'd agree. The whole premise of fantasy games is just that...they're FANTASY games. This whole situation stinks of fantasy and reality becoming too much the same thing. You can't discuss morality seriously in a fantasy game. It's just not condusive to fun gameplay. You play your alignment and let the other characters play theirs. We have a hard a fast rule at our table: good and neutral alignments only. I can't see how an adventuring party can work through 20 levels of play without trying to kill each other if there's good and evil alignments present.

Problem is, his character is Neutral(or maybe even good, I can't remember) and mine is good. He was angry at me because he felt that the author of the adventure was an idiot because he set up a scenario that NO one would agree with. Who would agree with depose the rightful ruler of a country? Especially if you were good. That causes WAY more problems than it solves.

I tried to explain that the current High Blade is NOT the rightful ruler of the country. She backstabbed the rightful ruler and imprisoned him. Then she took over. The old High Blade even wanted to take over the city "legally". The laws let you challenge the current High Blade to honorable combat to replace them. He wanted to fight honorably and regain his throne. He just needed our help to get him to the fight without assassins killing him off.

So, pretty much any lawful person would want to see him restored. Pretty much any good person would want to see the city under the influence of a much less evil ruler. The leader of the Wizard's Guild offered to pay us all to see the deed done so most greedy characters had a reason to help.

Unfortunately, he was playing a "Neutral" noble of the city who had sworn allegiance to the current High Blade. He was perfectly happy with the current situation in the city(the peasants hopelessly oppressed in order to make the nobles rich and fat...which seems pretty evil to me, but...whatever). He said he felt railroaded by the adventure to go on a mission that was stupid. The adventure does tell the DM what to do if the PCs decide to betray the old High Blade and turn him in instead of helping him. He didn't actually try to stop the rest of his group. He just complained that he was OBVIOUSLY being railroaded but since he had no choice at all, he might as well do what the adventure expected of him.

But he's been complaining all season for the last D&D Expeditions season. It takes place in Mulmaster and the city is pretty evil. He feels that every time we saved someone's life it was pointless because they were likely evil anyways. Each time someone sends us on a mission to help someone he complains that helping one person will accomplish nothing for the city, it'll still be horribly evil and corrupt.

But as I mentioned way earlier in this thread, he complains about almost EVERYTHING: Monsters are too hard, rules are stupid, adventure writers are idiots who don't know how to write or edit, the DM doesn't let his plans succeed when they are outside the box, and so on.

This, IMHO, is my take on the demise of your party and play. Were you aligned similarly (not necessarily equally) you might not have even had to deal with this conversation.

Unfortunately, we are playing Adventure's League games. So, we have to follow the character creation rules created by WOTC. Those rules allow all alignments other than NE and CE. So LE is allowed. I can't change that. Though, as I say above, his character wasn't officially Evil. He just was profiteering on the suffering of others and felt that since he wasn't doing it himself, it wasn't evil at all.

 

[Nellisir]

Oh goody, time to settle in with some popcorn and watch the fun.

 

[Umbran]

He said that he didn't understand that concept at all. I said "That's because you aren't good."

If I may - this was a problem. This was not a great choice on your part: You made it personal.

Remember what we say around here? Don't make it personal. Address the content of the statement, not the person of the speaker. If you do, you turn it into an ego-clash, not a reasoned conversation. You made it about *him* as a person, not about his logic.

And, when you think of it, what you said was kind of insulting. "You aren't good," you told him? In essence you told him he wasn't a good person! And you are somehow *surprised* that he got upset? You don't know what will set him off?

Dude, insults will set people off.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

You've now spent 29 pages of thread to figure out what to do...what is your decision? I think you've recieved a good amount of advice by now.

I know what I have to do. But it's not that easy. I honestly feel like someone I know and care about is dying every time I consider leaving the group. It feels like all I have to do is put up with this small inconvenience(in the grand scheme of things) and my friend doesn't die.

There are so many things I get out of a relationship with them. No one else I know wants to go to GenCon with me. They've been the absolutely most dedicated to showing up to my public games on Tuesdays. Everyone else misses fairly often.

I know they all sound like excuses. But it's REALLY hard for me to actually go through with this.